I find it highly incredible that sodaclubrefill.com still is in business after demonstrating such a lack of business sense. I think that they have well proven, that not only their site is unprofessional but also how they communicate with customers as well as how they represent themselves as a company. It is very amusing that they call one of their customers an "illiterate idiot" and a "punk". I wonder who really ends up being the "idiot" and "punk" when posting such comments in the name of their business on the World Wide Web.....emphasis on "world-wide". In fact, I had looked at their site many months ago and decided not to order from them because their website looked so "cheap". After reading these posts, I am glad I didn't.

On a different note, I ordered a paint-ball adapter from Sodaco2.com several months ago. Up to this point, I still haven't been able to get it to work. Sodaco2.com is extreme slow to respond but when they respond, they try to take care of the problem. They even offered to make a modification to the valve on my carbonator to insure that the adapter will work. However, the only paintball place in my area can't seem to get it done. Has anyone else used the paintball adapter from Sodaco2.com and can give me advice on how to get it to work?

Sorry but I had to jump in here and drop my two cents worth. So far there is only one individual (someone named lucrece) who wrote about an experience with this refill website.

Everyone else seems to want to just jump in and state how they won't do business with them and how unprofessional they are. Americans have developed such an insatiable need to destroy each other in recent years. Jumping in and dropping f-bombs and name calling is only the begining.

What is interesting is that not unlike the street corner, all of the opinions here (except lucrece's which may or may not be the complete story) are based on some interpretation of allegations made only by an on-screen name and avatar. Everyone else is just repeating hearsay.

Folks, the internet is a very informative and public place, it also provides some degree of anonymity. I suspect that in the real three dimensional world, none of you know anything first hand about the website/business in question, or the owner(s), or any facts associated with them. I would also venture to say that in the real 3D world, none of you would out of courtesy or humanity, dare say these things for fear of being wrong or hurting an innocent person or business.

Search your souls for one brief instance and analyze these writings. Isn't it really that the safety of anonymity has encouraged the nay sayers to write their hateful comments? What happened to civility? Benefit of the doubt? How about just simple silence if you have nothing factual or constructive to add?

I don't know if this lucrece individual is telling the truth, do you? Have any of you been in business? I have, and I can tell you that I have bitten several inches off my tongue when dealing with customers that just cannot be satisfied. I work as a store manager for a major nationwide retailer.

Believe me when I tell you there are thousands of horror stories and things some customers pull on us every day. Some cannot be satisfied at any cost, some will defraud you, lie, and cheat you out of any profits. Some I would rather never enter our store because I know they will cost us money.

Guess what, in the end, it is all of us that pay.

All I am saying is that civility and decorum are at a great risk of being lost in this cyberspace medium unless we start being more human to each other. Hearsay should not be the guiding word.

My two cents. Flame me if you must, it only serves to prove my points.

I find it highly incredible that sodaclubrefill.com still is in business after demonstrating such a lack of business sense. I think that they have well proven, that not only their site is unprofessional but also how they communicate with customers as well as how they represent themselves as a company. It is very amusing that they call one of their customers an "illiterate idiot" and a "punk". I wonder who really ends up being the "idiot" and "punk" when posting such comments in the name of their business on the World Wide Web.....emphasis on "world-wide". In fact, I had looked at their site many months ago and decided not to order from them because their website looked so "cheap". After reading these posts, I am glad I didn't.

On a different note, I ordered a paint-ball adapter from Sodaco2.com several months ago. Up to this point, I still haven't been able to get it to work. Sodaco2.com is extreme slow to respond but when they respond, they try to take care of the problem. They even offered to make a modification to the valve on my carbonator to insure that the adapter will work. However, the only paintball place in my area can't seem to get it done. Has anyone else used the paintball adapter from Sodaco2.com and can give me advice on how to get it to work?

Sounds like your review and comments should be about your actual experience with the sodaco2 people and not the other company. Again, here's an example of hearsay being proliferated without any facts. Have the sodaclub refill people sold you anything? Did they hurt you in any way? My ten bucks in my wallet say that if the only way you could say those negative things were face to face, in person, that you would not do so out of courtesy and manners.

Sounds like your review and comments should be about your actual experience with the sodaco2 people and not the other company. Again, here's an example of hearsay being proliferated without any facts. Have the sodaclub refill people sold you anything? Did they hurt you in any way? My ten bucks in my wallet say that if the only way you could say those negative things were face to face, in person, that you would not do so out of courtesy and manners.

From the response to the previous commenter, we can only assume that Anonymous is someone from SodaClubRefill.com again. The comments that Guest X wrote were not directed at any product sold by SodaClubRefill.com or direct experience with the company - both of which are very important aspects of business. What he was commenting on is a different aspect of doing business in the modern world - the good will of a brand and company as perceived by the general public. Given the readily accessible nature of reviews and comments on the web, Guest X points out that SodaClubRefill.com has chosen to retaliate, condescend, and/or attack their detractors instead of attempting to rectify, explain, or diffuse concerns over the conduct of the company (in the case of the first person who purchased goods) or the perceived professionalism (in the case of my comments on their website and Guest X's comments concerning SodaClubRefill's responses and name calling). Guest X's comments are valid even though he has not had direct experience with SodaClubRefill.com since how a company is seen to treat their previous customers is very important to new customers or those considering the use of a company's services.

Sounds like your review and comments should be about your actual experience with the sodaco2 people and not the other company. Again, here's an example of hearsay being proliferated without any facts. Have the sodaclub refill people sold you anything? Did they hurt you in any way? My ten bucks in my wallet say that if the only way you could say those negative things were face to face, in person, that you would not do so out of courtesy and manners.

From the response to the previous commenter, we can only assume that Anonymous is someone from SodaClubRefill.com again. The comments that Guest X wrote were not directed at any product sold by SodaClubRefill.com or direct experience with the company - both of which are very important aspects of business. What he was commenting on is a different aspect of doing business in the modern world - the good will of a brand and company as perceived by the general public. Given the readily accessible nature of reviews and comments on the web, Guest X points out that SodaClubRefill.com has chosen to retaliate, condescend, and/or attack their detractors instead of attempting to rectify, explain, or diffuse concerns over the conduct of the company (in the case of the first person who purchased goods) or the perceived professionalism (in the case of my comments on their website and Guest X's comments concerning SodaClubRefill's responses and name calling). Guest X's comments are valid even though he has not had direct experience with SodaClubRefill.com since how a company is seen to treat their previous customers is very important to new customers or those considering the use of a company's services.

Sorry to burst your bubble but I do not have any affiliation with that firm. Your assumption is wrong, condescending, presumptive, and downright insulting. Not unlike Guest X, you have assumed and christened as valid the hearsay comments of an obviously disgruntled customer that may or may not be either telling the truth or the complete story. Just as Guest X put his/her stamp of guilty by stating that said company had indeed treated the alleged customer badly, you sir are participating in the deception and promotion of the hearsay.

I have read your posts regarding this matter and can only arrive at one conclusion. That being, you are either a disgruntled customer yourself or you have a particular grudge or grievance with that company. The latter being a clue to any and all readers of your blogs and forums that you are not unbiased but rather a hate mongerer that seeks to destroy or humiliate others with your minuscule soap box.

As the prior posting stated, humanity is severely lacking. Civility is out the window. My wish is that some day, people as yourself who proliferate unsubstantiated commentary as fact, have to face either the gavel of a judge in a tort lawsuit, or the fist of a wronged human being.

Needless to say, the lack accountability granted by these blogs and forums only serve to protect the spineless and socially inept few that abuse the medium.

I challenge you to hold yourself to a higher standard and denounce non factual reviews, postings, or baseless demeaning commentary. That is not what this medium was intended to do.

Then again, asking the above is probably too much to ask because it detracts from the real objective here, write, harass, destroy, flame, and grin.

Guest X's comments are valid even though he has not had direct experience with SodaClubRefill.com since how a company is seen to treat their previous customers is very important to new customers or those considering the use of a company's services.

Michael, further analysis of your response is revealing many flaws in your attempts at being the unbiased individual you seem to portray. While this is your sandbox, and we are your guests, you still need to adhere to some semblance of decorum and objectivity if we are to take you seriously.

While your defense of Guest X is understandable, given your bias in favor of negative reviews on sodaclubrefill dot com, you readily admit that no real experience has ever occurred with said firm. Further review of your personal blog reveals the following comment you wrote on June 15th 2008, and I quote: "People I talk to seem confused about his stance on taxes, how his plan for health care differs from Clinton’s plan, and seem to believe he wants to pull all the troops out of Iraq on Day One. Unfortunately, people believe what they want to believe and don’t bother investigating for themselves." The latter being a comment regarding presidential elections.

I would urge you to heed your own comments by embracing the part of "Investigating for themselves" and not just believing what you want to believe.

Further research reveals your own comments in this Forum, under the Reviews area where you commented about this website. In that area you stated, and I quote: "I do not "pull punches" - if I like a product, I say so. If I dislike it, I will make note of that as well. Often it is simply not worth my time to write a negative or middle-of-the-road review because I prefer to provide my readership with information that guides them to make correct purchases for themselves. For simplicity's sake, readers should assume that everything I review has been provided to me to test free of charge unless I say otherwise... I'm always up for reexamining my practices."

Again, you should heed your own comments, reexamine your practices. Have you reviewed the company's products? Do you have firsthand knowledge of the facts? Have the users posting the allegations done so in a fair and fully disclosed fashion?

While I realize there is a thin line that separates freedom of speech and outright slander / libel. Those as yourself who portray themselves as reviewers or consumer advocates should consider the information sources and how far that thin line is being crossed. No disclaimer in your policy section can serve as a shield from liability for content you post on a for profit site as yours. Especially if said content is found to be malicious, unfounded or outright false. Not to mention the fact that it cheapens the perception of professionalism you espouse to the public. Your CFE Inc. corporate immunity stops when you as an individual participate in said conduct, voluntarily, and with impunity.

It is probably fair to say that you do not enjoy the same protections granted under freedom of the press to news agencies and the like. While I do not advocate litigation as a means to resolve problems, sometimes it is necessary as a means to set precedent and prevent future injustice. I don't think you'll be sued over your comments, but a good question to ask yourself is "could I sustain or survive one?".

Lastly, this is really more about what is right versus what is tasty gossip. You appear to be an educated well rounded individual. If that is truly who you are, and not just another geek in the basement, then you should consider "reexamining" your approach to negative commentary based on hearsay. To continue doing so only violates your very own code of conduct.

I find it highly incredible that sodaclubrefill.com still is in business after demonstrating such a lack of business sense. I think that they have well proven, that not only their site is unprofessional but also how they communicate with customers as well as how they represent themselves as a company. It is very amusing that they call one of their customers an "illiterate idiot" and a "punk". I wonder who really ends up being the "idiot" and "punk" when posting such comments in the name of their business on the World Wide Web.....emphasis on "world-wide". In fact, I had looked at their site many months ago and decided not to order from them because their website looked so "cheap". After reading these posts, I am glad I didn't.

I find it highly incredible that you, Guest X, can post with such certainty that the original thread poster (lucrece) was factual in his/her account of dealings with the company. Is it possible that you are also lucrece? You appear to be so certain as to the allegations that it makes me wonder. If not, then I do apologize for the assumption.

How do you know that the company or a representative of the company posted said statements or participated in name calling? Everyone here has the privilege of anonymity, are you sure?

Your comments are not amusing, especially if one considers the possibility that they may be either incorrect or just outright false, no one really knows except the company and the original poster. All you have done is proliferate hearsay as being fact.

The only fact you seem to inject here is only an opinion that their website looked "cheap". The latter being a very subjective judgment since websites are a product of creativity and art blended with useful information. You also state that you did not make a purchase due to the "cheap" look, yet no mention as to the technical merits or drawbacks of their product(s). I do find humorous as well as contradictory is your following comment:

Guest X wrote:

On a different note, I ordered a paint-ball adapter from Sodaco2.com several months ago. Up to this point, I still haven't been able to get it to work. Sodaco2.com is extreme slow to respond but when they respond, they try to take care of the problem. They even offered to make a modification to the valve on my carbonator to insure that the adapter will work. However, the only paintball place in my area can't seem to get it done. Has anyone else used the paintball adapter from Sodaco2.com and can give me advice on how to get it to work?

Looks to me like you were taken on a ride greatly due to your own self imposed ignorance and arrogance. Having the benefit of my wife's profession as a Real Estate Trial Lawyer, I enlisted the help of one of her colleagues, a case researcher. I asked him to find out what he could about sodaco2 dot com and any public information on them or the owners. Here's what he just emailed me:

SodaCo2.com is owned by a Mr. Gair Lowery of San Antonio Texas. The business is operated out of his apartment [edited by moderator to remove personal address]

Mr. Lowery has several Public Filings of Judgments, Liens, and Law Suits as well as a Felony Criminal Drug Convictions in 2002, in San Antonio Texas. Research also indicates many complaints on eBay as well as PayPal for fraudulent business practices and non delivery of goods. His eBay seller name is sodaclubrefill (no "s" at the end, that is sodaclubrefill dot com's user name on eBay). It appears by the membership date that sodaco2 stole the name and idea from sodaclubrefill dot com. It is also fair to note that sodaclubrefill has a 90% reliability rating according to eBay due to negative feedback for deception and non delivery of goods. In contrast, sodaclubrefills has a 100% reliability and satisfaction rating.

Sounds like you've been had! It also sounds like you don't really research who you deal with but are more than willing to jump blindly on a bashing bandwagon..

Being curious, I visited the sodaco2 website and found it to be very uninformative on their products and their use as well as lacking in features desired by people interested in soda machine co2 alternatives. In contrast, the sodaclubrefill dot com website was overwhelmingly filled with just about everything there was to know about the subject matter, including detailed pricing, options, faq's and user support forum.

The above could possibly explain Guest X's poor "factual" experience with sodaco2 dot com as opposed to his inexperience and lack of factual knowledge with the sodaclubrefill dot com firm.

Guest X, your commentary is blatantly flawed and biased. Unless of course you are really lucrece in disguise and are here only for the purpose of stacking the deck. Again, if I am mistaken, I apologize for the misreading.

Since you have allegedly never made contact with the people at sodaclubrefill dot com, you may want to consider re visiting their so called "cheap" website and see if they will render any assistance with your dilemma and non functioning product. I know that when people walk into my store with questions, even if they are competitor related like Target or CostCo, I still help them with the hope of someday winning their business. Do you have the spine to do that or are you content with just bashing them with hearsay? Unless of course you are lucrece, which I again apologize if I am mistaken.

As an update, I ordered an adapter from sodaco2.com and for half the price sodaclubrefill.com tried to charge me, I was able to do exactly what I needed to do - adapt Soda Club bottles to be refilled at standard refilling stations.

Hmmm... Is it safe to assume that Guest X is really "lucrece" in disguise?

Isn't there any backbone any more? Is this medium so conveniently anonymous that people can throw stones at each other and then duck behind an avatar? I know that my posts are also perceived as equally anonymous, but I have yet to bash anyone or fail to provide factual accounts of my findings.

Michael, I now realize what has driven your offensive posture towads my comments and in favor of those bashing the people at sodaclubrefill dot com, your driving force is MONEY! Pure and simple, they are advertisers here! Heck, they probably even sent you the machine you evaluated back on page 1 of this thread! You have been unmasked my friend! That actually adds contempt and questions of character in my humble opinion.

Your little soapbox here is just a revenue stream with modifiable ethics that will result in free merchandise and a stroke to your evidently immense ego and self assessment. I'm no psychology major but a quick glance at your postings in the blogs and forums you control offers a very clear picture of a narcissistic self absorbed individual. Then again, most engineers I know suffer from the same God complex.

It's all clear to me now. This is probably my last post since people with God complexes usually fix things with a delete key or other means of distorting the facts.

>>but I have yet to bash anyone or fail to provide factual accounts of my findings.

that's because you have not posted any facts.

if you're a "Guest, with the facts." what are the facts you are "with" and where did they come from?

>>they probably even sent you the machine you evaluated back on page 1 of this thread!
demonstrated fact of total ignorance in how product reviews work.

>>Pure and simple, they are advertisers here!
actual fact: show me the ad

>>Then again, most engineers I know suffer from the same God complex.
methinks you've got yourself severely confused - it appears to be you who insists you are omnipotent - but it still leaves the fact that you have not posted any "facts" - just rants, raves and baseless accusations.
little response other than your own - that's because the people who hang around here actually operate within the bounds of logic.

>>since people with God complexes usually fix things with a delete key
do take notice, none of your posts - with all kinds of outrageous claims of "fact" - have been deleted, edited or modified.

Oh Dilbert... you crack me up! Is your basement dark too? Too many Twinkies and Diet Cokes? I wish I had the will power to respond properly, but instead, I think I'll just watch you use your little flame thrower and amuse yourself. Your comments give me great pause for reflection on our country's sad state of dysfunction.

Suffice it to say that I have posted only the facts, the research and verification is left up to those who are interested or are genuinely unbiased. Dilbert is obviously not in that category.

I am very well aware of the review process as posted by the illustrious Mr. Chu. As for ads from Soda-Club or Sodastream, open your eyes and you will see them in the footers and headers of this site along with ads from hundreds of others who contribute to Mr. Chu's income. Not unlike the people at JD Power and Associates, Mr. Chu reviews according to his revenue stream and quashes dissenting views with crass remarks and proliferation of hearsay. As long as the revenue stream is protected, who cares about the truth. Right?

Flame on Dilbert! This is like watching a train wreck of sugar overdosed geeks.

that's because you have not posted any facts. if you're a "Guest, with the facts." what are the facts you are "with" and where did they come from?

Are you capable of reading anything other than C++ code? Read the postings and you will be enlightened. Of yourse, that is assuming there's objectivity on your behalf.

Dilbert wrote:

methinks you've got yourself severely confused - it appears to be you who insists you are omnipotent - but it still leaves the fact that you have not posted any "facts" - just rants, raves and baseless accusations. little response other than your own - that's because the people who hang around here actually operate within the bounds of logic.

Moi? Omnipotent? Are you suffering from the disorder also known as Penis Envy? All I have done is point out the obvious. Your little elite bashers have been called out on the carpet and you don't like it. Baseless accusations? That's the basis of this entire thread, accusations by either a real or fictional customer of a business, further promoted by the sycophants of Mr. Chu and his advertisers. As for bounds of logic, sir, I know Mr. Spock... you sir are NO Mr. Spock. Read your own drivel ato yourself in front of a mirror and see if it is logical.

>>do take notice, none of your posts - with all kinds of outrageous claims of "fact" - have been deleted, edited or modified. that's a fact - now explain your rant.[/quote]

okay, I hope you feel better now that you've gotten that out of your system.

so perhaps we can get back to the facts?

repeat:
if you're a "Guest, with the facts." what are the facts you are "with" and where did they come from?

if you are not sodaclubrefill.com or lucrece, then by your own definitions you have no factual information relating to that situation.

you do need to look at the name calling, insults and obnoxious behavior you've demonstrated on this Forum.

you are blatantly engaging in the precisely the anonymous cowardly circular insulting rhetoric of what you purport to be so dysfunctional in this country.

Oh Dilbert... stop that, I can't laugh any harder! The facts I have posted are in the form of observations of the basher's agendas.

- You asked about the facts relating to ads being in this forum and I showed you where they are, ALL OVER THIS FORUM. Put your glasses back on!

- You asked about the facts relating to my other posts, and I already stated their source as being PUBLIC RECORDS RESEARCHED BY A LAW FIRM. I only posted that as a rebuttal to Guest X's suspiciously awkward praise of the sodaco2 firm. Guest X, bashes one company, praises sodaco2, gets screwed by sodaco2, then asks for help. Where's your critique on this one? Cat got your tongue?

Beyond that, all my statements have been about the lack of facts and/or substance to the accusations flying to and from Chu, Guest X, and lucrece, the last two being suspiciously one in the same.

What do you need, an information enema? Want someone to read the posts to you s l o w l y? All you appear to be doing is parsing every letter in every sentence so it suits your purpose and then use it as a distraction to redirect the debate. Gibbs does that quite well for Obama at the White House. Are you Chu's version of Gibbs the Spin Meister?

So let's summarize, if I am not lucrece or sodaclubrefill, according to you I don't have the facts? Yes, that is correct, that is what I have already stated ad nauseum! NONE OF YOU have those relevant facts either, including Chu, Guest X, and YOU. The ONLY facts presented here so far are that this forum is laughable and should not be taken seriously as an unbiased source of information. Anyone can jump in here and anonymously write whatever they want about anyone, and do so anonymously or under the monikers of lucrece, Guest X, sodaclubrefill, Dilbert, etc, and do so without the need for accountability. Mr. Chu, the Gatekeeper, can play favorites at will, as long as his revenue stream from advertisers like Google, Illy, GM, and SodaClub keeps flowing.

It's probably safe to say that in the real world, when faced with the possibility of real consequences for your actions, moderation and civility would prevail. No one likes to get their teeth knocked down their throat when they insult another person face to face, especially when malice is the only motivator. In this medium, you enjoy the safety an DSL connection can bring (some of the time).

Flame on Dilbert! You never disappoint! Since this is Chu's Cooking Forum, you should try some recipes for Fricassee of Crow.

>>The facts I have posted are in the form of observations of the basher's agendas.
there but one single sodaclubrefill.com 'basher' - if you choose to call lucrece that

you are the one bashing sodaco2 - and everyone else who has defended lucrece's right to voice their experience or opinion.

no one else has 'bashed' sodaclubrefill.com - they merely observed theywould not care to do business with an individual exhibiting the posted behavior.

it is you who has bashed Michael Chu with your completely unfounded assumptions of fact as to how this web site operates. you do not have that information - so you choose to bash others for exactly what you have done / are doing.

"Civility is out the window."
you are doing a very good job at proving that.

"Needless to say, the lack accountability granted by these blogs and forums only serve to protect the spineless and socially inept few that abuse the medium. "
note: Mr. Chu is not anonymous, nor am I, but you are.
"Is this medium so conveniently anonymous that people can throw stones at each other and then duck behind an avatar?"
note: exactly what you have done / are doing.
"This is like watching a train wreck of sugar overdosed geeks"
note: oh, definitely a train wreck - my opinion is you are driving your own wrecked train
"Are you suffering from the disorder also known as Penis Envy?"
"Read your own drivel ato (sic) yourself in front of a mirror and see if it is logical."
note: now, what was that about civility?
"Guest X, bashes one company, praises sodaco2, gets screwed by sodaco2, then asks for help. Where's your critique on this one? Cat got your tongue? "
note: nope. I guess that's why you choose to "expose" sodaco2 past. smells like competitor bashing to me.
"What do you need, an information enema? Want someone to read the posts to you s l o w l y?"
note: yes, I need you to slowly explain how you have any facts to dispute anyone's opinion about what happened between sodaclubrefill.com and lucrece.

you now say you have no facts regarding what happened between sodaclubrefill.com and lucrece.
I submit you also have no facts about this web site.
I submit you also have no facts or knowledge about how web site advertising works.

so what we're left with is:
(1) one person posted their first person experience, which was not good, with an online company.
(2) the other party to that dispute chose to respond in a very unprofessional manner - see the multiple comments, my opinion is not singular on that topic.
(3) being entirely fact driven yourself, you insist that item (1) should be disallowed as their is no proof that the item (1) poster ever had business dealings with the item (2) poster and furthermore there is not proof that the item (2) poster is actually the 'other party' to the dispute.
(4) note that you have not objected to item (2) postings - frankly, considering the respect and civility you have displayed in this thread, I'm not surprised.
(5) note that 'other party' - despite the public opportunity to pour oil on the water, be civil and resolve the issue(s), choose another approach.
(6) a subsequent poster expressed their reluctance to deal with the item (2) poster
(7) being entirely fact driven yourself, you insist that the item (6) poster should be disallowed because they have no experience with the item (2) poster. Apparently you have never asked someone for a recommendation?

you claim to have no interest in any of this. your stated motive is simply to insist that civility should rule. you have failed your own motive with the continued insults and innuendo.

in the end analysis, according to your own windmill tilting, no one should be permitted to express their experiences on-line, as there is no proof they actually had an experience.

quite frankly, it is entirely possible that you are Guest X, posting here to simply to generate a discussion where you, representing sodaclubrefill.com, could generate an opportunity to bash your competition with their past history.

your adamant flaming and insulting of essentially everyone in the Forum and in the thread certainly does not support the theory that you are an un-involved individual.

“this forum is laughable and should not be taken seriously”
Your posts firmly establish which party is laughable.

Like I said Dilbert, or is it Gibbs? You never disappoint! What a Twinkie High you must be on!

You're not anonymous? Why don't you post your email address, home phone, cell phone, real name, and address here? Oh, I know why... your slow but not stupid. You'd rather flame and hide. The latter being what everyone does here, myself included to the extent that I have voiced my opinion as a non registered guest. Registering here would by hypocritical considering how I feel about the lack of objectivity and bias in this forum.

Personally, I stay anonymous for fear of having to put a 50 cal in a an obsessed stalker's forehead. So, in the spirit of avoiding breaking the law, I just blend into this cesspool you people call a discussion forum.

No one here is my competitor, I have no horse in this race other than being fed up with hit and run artists like lucrece, guest x, Chu, and you. I'm not in business, financially do not need one, nor do I care to be in one. Especially if it means dealing with vile peopl, yourself included. Surely you as well as everyone is entitled to an opinion, that's what makes this country great.

So Dilbert, please press on with that code you're working on for your employer. Pay your taxes on time and keep the flames rolling. I just love it when you rant! How do I know you're a geek? Only a geek watches out for missed keystrokes or minor typos. It's part of their anal retentive DNA which also accounts for their crass behavior and separation anxieties.

Is Chu paying you a commission on a per word basis or is this just a freebie hatchet job? Ah, don't bother responding, I recognize lackeys when I see their rants, your opinions while being disturbing, do amuse me and has provided hours of laughter for my wife and colleagues. I know that it is a lot of fun because everyone at her law office has tuned in to observe your neck swelling and fist pounding responses. BTW, so far the applause is deafening, everyone is thoroughly enjoying your performance. You should consider America's Got Talent.

Oops... I changed my mind, please respond! I want to hear the sound of your suspenders popping as you crack open another vial of angina medication. I know this is getting to you. You are so predictable!